Should there be just one semi pro team in London?

[OriginalMrC]

2 hours ago, crashmon said:

Part of the problem is also that the superleage is well not really super outside of the M62.  The Superleague is the primary competition for Rugby League in the northern hemisphere, but has less awareness in London, than other sports. Its probably equal to BBL or EIHL or Netball Super League in awareness. It is far behind NFL or NBA.

A NFL Franchise in London would have far more chance of succeeding than say a SuperLeage franchise like Broncos or Skolars

This is a very negative way to look at things. And if London got an NFL franchise they'd pump a billion quid in to try to make it a success (even then not guaranteed). The reason why London doesn't have an NFL franchise is because of the huge amount of money it would take. London Monarchs after initial success were a failure after huge amounts of money pumped in. Do you think if someone came along with a billion quid they couldn't make Skolars or Broncos a success? 

[Cw25]

2 hours ago, Smudger06 said:

Hunslet could be well within their rights to rename themselves Leeds Hawks or whatever Leeds (they used Hawks at one bit in the past) that in itself would possibly generate more credibility for the sport and sooth the big city dreamers....but I doubt Leeds Rhinos and certain allied clubs would let that rebrand happen at the RFL.....even if the fans didn't mind......same goes for Swinton Lions ~ Manchester Lions simple rename but keep Swinton in the small print on the badge, its a no brainer but fans will not let it happen either. 

A big, big no. No team name change. No mergers.Never. These Greater Manchester teams, Well Yorkshire ones too have been around longer than me and you. Each of these teams belong to their area. Any change would never work. I admit it, I am old fashioned. Against a lot of change. But messing like that is red rag to a bull with me even more. No offence to you Smudger. You are one of a number of people that have suggested it.

[Smudger06]

1 hour ago, Cw25 said:

A big, big no. No team name change. No mergers.Never. These Greater Manchester teams, Well Yorkshire ones too have been around longer than me and you. Each of these teams belong to their area. Any change would never work. I admit it, I am old fashioned. Against a lot of change. But messing like that is red rag to a bull with me even more. No offence to you Smudger. You are one of a number of people that have suggested it.

None taken mate. 

[crashmon]

3 hours ago, OriginalMrC said:

This is a very negative way to look at things. And if London got an NFL franchise they'd pump a billion quid in to try to make it a success (even then not guaranteed). The reason why London doesn't have an NFL franchise is because of the huge amount of money it would take. London Monarchs after initial success were a failure after huge amounts of money pumped in. Do you think if someone came along with a billion quid they couldn't make Skolars or Broncos a success? 

London Monarchs did not work as they never was part of NFL but NFL Europe, a much smaller comp. There is far far more money and exposure in NFL in one year compared to 10 years in Rugby League.  A London team in the actual NFL would work, and its not much farther from New York to London as to say LA.

It would be interesting to see the figures for the superbowl on sky vs RL grand final.

[Archie Gordon]

Back to needing a London strategy ...

My current view is that the London & SE area doesn't actually need a pro club to sit at the top of its pyramid but it does need a professionally-run academy/scholarship programme. I think that this programme should be independent of any club so that it's unaffected by the wax and wane of the Broncos' fortunes. Could it be run by the RFL? By some other body? Could it be sustainable if proper compensation was received for players graduating to pro teams? Something to think about.

Any pro clubs in or around London & SE would obviously benefit from an academy on their doorstep but its existence shouldn't depend on the caprices of a pro club owner. We need to break that link IMO and allow 0, 1, 2 or more pro clubs to emerge in or around the capital. They'd all need private finance - which would be fine.

I should also add that the SCL is a really important part of the landscape too. Clubs at that level should be aiming to imitate their NCL equivalents in terms of growing assets, members, players, volunteers.

[Bob8]

7 hours ago, Damien said:

I think history shows that scattergun approaches to expansion don't work as either the funding dries up or volunteers move on. Clubs working in geographic isolation have an almighty battle as is it is but trying to do this stuff in isolation with no real competition or even teams to play against is nigh on impossible. Informal matches, festivals etc have their place but there becomes a point were people want more and other sports usually easily provide that. It all becomes too difficult for any volunteer and costly too.

Teams need proper competitions and clubs to play against to provide anything fulfilling to potential players. I've always thought that the game should be looking at targeted specific areas, hubs so the speak and building out from there. Aim to create 12 clubs in 1 hour travel time and a proper league. Don't try and develop the country poorly and with little resources, use what we have in much smaller areas and in places where clubs can link into existing infrastructure. I think the development officer being here today and gone tomorrow approach is pretty useless really.

Having been involved in a few expansion clubs, I would say a handful of capable voluteers can start a club anywhere, as long as one can coach. They can start a propoerous club and develop community roots.

That is exceedingly rare though.

The other thing that is difficult is working out what will work in each area. If what worked was purely the sport itself, and a rock track over a YouTube video, then we would have overtaken soccer a long time ago. Back when Danish rugby league was working in Copenhagen, they were going for a rather hipster crowd, which fitted as they had money and did not have a filled up market. But again, a few volunteers left and it fell apart. At the moment there is an initiative to bring games to village fates, as the local councils will pay for that and there is not the hipster market in countryside. It is not a model that would work in the UK, just as the UK model would not work in Denmark.

"Informal matches, festivals etc have their place but there becomes a point were people want more and other sports usually easily provide that."
Often, the festival aspect is an after thought. I suggest that where possible, it si easier to bring a game to a crowd rather than a crowd to a game. If your main focus the crowd, things are easier. If you just set up the thing you want them to like and try and make it more palatable with a beer and hot dog stand, of course it will flop and will deserve to.

All to often, we try to recreate what we fell in love with. There was a poster who was convinced that London desperately needed a mass spectator working class sport, because he was from Leigh and did not believe that soccer had filled that niche.

I would suggest that when you describe a proper league, you are slightly falling into that trap. I would suggest a couple of things that might appear daft:
- Do we need a proper league? In soccer the Champions League, World Cup etc all manage without one? We should not assume that success has a certain format.
- Super League is viable as it is a product for a national satellite broadcaster which will pay slightly over the odds for a must have product that will make people pay for a satellite dish. Those days might be coming to an end, and we should be wondering what the future is. I suggest it is more international and perhaps as a second rate product for wealthy cities that do not have top flight sport at the moment (Brussels vs Oslo (or Ealing) in front of 1000 might well be more economically viable that two working class two towns in front of 3000).

[Bob8]

1 hour ago, Archie Gordon said:

Back to needing a London strategy ...

My current view is that the London & SE area doesn't actually need a pro club to sit at the top of its pyramid but it does need a professionally-run academy/scholarship programme. I think that this programme should be independent of any club so that it's unaffected by the wax and wane of the Broncos' fortunes. Could it be run by the RFL? By some other body? Could it be sustainable if proper compensation was received for players graduating to pro teams? Something to think about.

Any pro clubs in or around London & SE would obviously benefit from an academy on their doorstep but its existence shouldn't depend on the caprices of a pro club owner. We need to break that link IMO and allow 0, 1, 2 or more pro clubs to emerge in or around the capital. They'd all need private finance - which would be fine.

I should also add that the SCL is a really important part of the landscape too. Clubs at that level should be aiming to imitate their NCL equivalents in terms of growing assets, members, players, volunteers.

I very much agree.

London has lots of top class sport. They have no need for more of it. If London clubs find a niche, it will need not be trying to compete with the exiting dominant sports.

[Archie Gordon]

20 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

I very much agree.

London has lots of top class sport. They have no need for more of it. If London clubs find a niche, it will need not be trying to compete with the exiting dominant sports.

Yes, your earlier comment about the saturated London sports market made my mind up for me about not needing a pro club at the top of a pyramid. If folk want to come in and pay for one, great, but we shouldn't be relying on one.

[Bob8]

23 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Yes, your earlier comment about the saturated London sports market made my mind up for me about not needing a pro club at the top of a pyramid. If folk want to come in and pay for one, great, but we shouldn't be relying on one.

Blimey.

I am not used to convincing people.

[zylya]

1 hour ago, Archie Gordon said:

Yes, your earlier comment about the saturated London sports market made my mind up for me about not needing a pro club at the top of a pyramid. If folk want to come in and pay for one, great, but we shouldn't be relying on one.

I would go further and say that, without a comprehensive grassroots/community base underneath, a pro club will never be successful.

[MonkeyGone]

Development of players through the academy setup has arguably been the London Broncos main success over the last 15 years or so. It remains to be seen if that will survive the loss of Rob Powell.

The appointment by Broncos of the Skolars coach and subsequent raiding of their players is not IMO in the best interests of London rugby league and has led to both teams being weakened.  

Broncos are in a worse shape though as they have chosen to recruit their worst ever squad when they are trying to attract new fans at a new ground. The anti midas touch of Hughes is in full effect.

 

[Cowboy]

1 hour ago, MonkeyGone said:

Development of players through the academy setup has arguably been the London Broncos main success over the last 15 years or so. It remains to be seen if that will survive the loss of Rob Powell.

The appointment by Broncos of the Skolars coach and subsequent raiding of their players is not IMO in the best interests of London rugby league and has led to both teams being weakened.  

Broncos are in a worse shape though as they have chosen to recruit their worst ever squad when they are trying to attract new fans at a new ground. The anti midas touch of Hughes is in full effect.

 

Losing 8-0 to Whitehaven isn't ideal,agreed.

The same Whitehaven team,put 32 points on a full time Broncos outfit last season, convincingly winning.

Not sure if worst ever squad currently just yet like,give it time.

[RP London]

On 15/02/2022 at 18:15, Bob8 said:

I very much agree.

London has lots of top class sport. They have no need for more of it. If London clubs find a niche, it will need not be trying to compete with the exiting dominant sports.

This was something IMHO that was working the early 00s.. funding was coming in for development officers.. they in turn were going into schools that didnt have a lot of sport going on for one reason or another. They were then putting club routes down to capitalise on any interest they were getting.. 

It wasnt scatter gun, it was planned. It was reaping rewards too we had U14s, U16s and 3 senior teams out under the storm banner one weekend, we also had loads of u8-u12s under different lower teir club names (croydon hurricanes, Brixton Bulls, Thornhill Thunder IIRC).. the plan was that these would become the feeder clubs to Storm over time with senior teams under those names.. all with Storm at the top of that pyramid feeding into broncos/skolars.. The next year this continued to grow.. Then money got taken away and it all fell apart because we lost the full time people running this.. Storm as a senior club stayed strong (until some issues with a manager that i am not fully aware of so dont want go into) because of the players and admin being linked but junior clubs needed those DO's to help out.. 

London felt, when i was there, in a very healthy and growing state when the DOs existed and the RFL were putting money into it.. it has gone down hill since and I cannot help but believe it is heavily down to the RFL pulling funding. That then knocks on to the pro clubs as eyes on the game are less, schools arent seeing it as people arent going into show it etc.. 

If i were to try and fix the game in London and had money to spend i would spend it on specialist people to work as DOs and do that sort of work again.. I think having Broncos there definitely helps but the money is better invested in DOs and i think that would then help a resurgence in the Broncos too (a nice virtuous circle starting with money into the schools/junior program).

 

All just my opinion of course.

[Bob8]

18 minutes ago, RP London said:

This was something IMHO that was working the early 00s.. funding was coming in for development officers.. they in turn were going into schools that didnt have a lot of sport going on for one reason or another. They were then putting club routes down to capitalise on any interest they were getting.. 

It wasnt scatter gun, it was planned. It was reaping rewards too we had U14s, U16s and 3 senior teams out under the storm banner one weekend, we also had loads of u8-u12s under different lower teir club names (croydon hurricanes, Brixton Bulls, Thornhill Thunder IIRC).. the plan was that these would become the feeder clubs to Storm over time with senior teams under those names.. all with Storm at the top of that pyramid feeding into broncos/skolars.. The next year this continued to grow.. Then money got taken away and it all fell apart because we lost the full time people running this.. Storm as a senior club stayed strong (until some issues with a manager that i am not fully aware of so dont want go into) because of the players and admin being linked but junior clubs needed those DO's to help out.. 

London felt, when i was there, in a very healthy and growing state when the DOs existed and the RFL were putting money into it.. it has gone down hill since and I cannot help but believe it is heavily down to the RFL pulling funding. That then knocks on to the pro clubs as eyes on the game are less, schools arent seeing it as people arent going into show it etc.. 

If i were to try and fix the game in London and had money to spend i would spend it on specialist people to work as DOs and do that sort of work again.. I think having Broncos there definitely helps but the money is better invested in DOs and i think that would then help a resurgence in the Broncos too (a nice virtuous circle starting with money into the schools/junior program).

 

All just my opinion of course.

Thanks for the post, and a time when we were both new on here. 

[Templegreen]

2 hours ago, MonkeyGone said:

Development of players through the academy setup has arguably been the London Broncos main success over the last 15 years or so. It remains to be seen if that will survive the loss of Rob Powell.

The appointment by Broncos of the Skolars coach and subsequent raiding of their players is not IMO in the best interests of London rugby league and has led to both teams being weakened.  

Broncos are in a worse shape though as they have chosen to recruit their worst ever squad when they are trying to attract new fans at a new ground. The anti midas touch of Hughes is in full effect.

 

Broncos are in even worse shape than is publicly on view and are now having to borrow a significant number of current Skolars players to be able to fulfil their reserve team fixture this weekend - you could not make it up!

[RP London]

25 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

Thanks for the post, and a time when we were both new on here. 

longer ago than either of us would wish to believe!

[Cowboy]

1 hour ago, Templegreen said:

Broncos are in even worse shape than is publicly on view and are now having to borrow a significant number of current Skolars players to be able to fulfil their reserve team fixture this weekend - you could not make it up!

Such as?

[Archie Gordon]

I hadn't realised that a reserves team was mandatory if you had a licenced academy. Perhaps this mess isn't wholly of Broncos' making.

[THE RED ROOSTER]

The latest of the London threads...

FWIW , sports have windows of opportunity when they can launch a new product. In the case in London this was 1980 and 1996. For a number of reasons which have been discussed at length on this board. Rugby League never built on a fast start.

The only point I would say, is that as any marketer should know there are only a certain number of times you can relaunch a product and if changing from Marathon to Snickers does not catch on then it probably means people are not into peanut bars whatever you call them.

What you now have with London Broncos is a failed club which is now a toxic brand to the majority of its former core audience and this has damned the whole sport in the south.

When London Broncos moved to Ealing it was said on this board, that had to be the final move for the club another move would kill the club and so it is proving. What people did not take into account is that the Broncos would asset-strip London Skolars to the extent the Skolars may well beat the Broncos to the Rugby League clubs graveyard.

Invoking the TRL postcode test, down here in the richest part of the UK, Rugby League has zero profile apart from those of us who are already into the sport and even then former Broncos fans, like myself, have drifted back to whatever sports they watched before and grew up with.

There are two paralells with Rugby League as imported sports. Ice Hockey which used to boast the London Knights around the turn of the century and has dissappeared to becoming a small time provincial sport and American Football where an NFL franchise may well be in place by 2030. American Football had an initial period of success from 1982-1995 then went into a hiatus beforev reviving from 2007 to date.

What both sports have in common with league

a) an Imported sport

b) No national media coverage down here.

One sport is back the other not, which proves you can never say the door is shut competely on a sport.

Back to the OP, the best solution for London would be the collapse of both clubs and the formation of a community based League 1 club say "London Phoenix" funded by a consortium of exiled bloodnuts and making use of the voluntary efforts of its supporters. London could never be an AFC Wimbledon because the fan base has eroded to the extent it could not be a supporters Trust. What it can do is take a leaf out of Saracens and have close links betwen the club and the Supporters Assocation to the extent that the supportes have  afn representative on the board. The point here any new club would be a joint effort between the board, players and supporters.

What it cannot do is have any link with the soiled Broncos brand, for if Rugby League is to have any future as a sport it is through putting distance between any new outfit and the erros of the past.

[Wigan Riversider]

2 hours ago, Archie Gordon said:

I hadn't realised that a reserves team was mandatory if you had a licenced academy. Perhaps this mess isn't wholly of Broncos' making.

News to me that such a stipulation exists.

[Archie Gordon]

23 minutes ago, Wigan Riversider said:

News to me that such a stipulation exists.

Got it from https://www.rugby-league.com/article/36629/reserves-rugby-league-returns-this-week. 

[MonkeyGone]

52 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Got it from https://www.rugby-league.com/article/36629/reserves-rugby-league-returns-this-week. 

Was pleased to see via RFL Match Centre that Broncos wil play Reserve and Academy games at Richmond Athletic Ground. 

[watcherofRL]

On 13/02/2022 at 20:22, dead man inc said:

With no pro/semi pro route in London the decent young players will simply go to union.

Union don’t have pathways to offer as they take all youngsters into the programmes and then xherry pick one or two and send rest back deflated having paid for kit and claimed they are part of saracens or Quinn’s dpp

[Smudger06]

I feel Broncos is a rubbish brand in the UK anyhow, its only that because of a failed partnership with Brisbane Broncos isn't it? 

London Unbroken Horses or London Feral Horses would be a better effort.

[MonkeyGone]

The name is the least of Broncos problems. Having said that so was the ground.